Does God Exist?

[Indeependent]

Try to understand the Hebrew and how it used. Today, we are familiar with the expression, "In my grandfather's day..." Certainly no one takes that to mean their grandfather lived one day.

No. One day = 24 hrs. In the prophecies, one day = one year.

"In our opinion, examination of the Hebrew word for “day” and the context in which it appears in Genesis will lead to the conclusion that “day” means a literal, 24-hour period of time.

The Hebrew word yom translated into the English “day” can mean more than one thing. It can refer to the 24-hour period of time that it takes for the earth to rotate on its axis (e.g., “there are 24 hours in a day”). It can refer to the period of daylight between dawn and dusk (e.g., “it gets pretty hot during the day but it cools down a bit at night”). And it can refer to an unspecified period of time (e.g., “back in my grandfather’s day . . .”). It is used to refer to a 24-hour period in Genesis 7:11. It is used to refer to the period of daylight between dawn and dusk in Genesis 1:16. And it is used to refer to an unspecified period of time in Genesis 2:4. So, what does yom mean in Genesis 1:5–2:2 when used in conjunction with ordinal numbers (i.e., the first day, the second day, the third day, the fourth day, the fifth day, the sixth day, and the seventh day)? Are these 24-hour periods or something else? Could yom as it is used here mean an unspecified period of time?"

Does Genesis chapter 1 mean literal 24-hour days? | GotQuestions.org

Does Genesis chapter 1 mean literal 24-hour days? Could the days in Genesis chapter 1 represent long periods of time?

www.gotquestions.org

AFAIK, this is how creation science interprets it, but some believe in evolution or false science.

One "Day" is Erev (Mixture) and Clarity (Boker) which is why, according to Torah law, an thing that requires a Yom does not require a 24 hour period.

 

[Newtonian]

As I understand it, everywhere we look in the universe, the galaxies are moving away from us. If the universe is not expanding, how would you account for what we see?

You're not going to like this answer: "Covering yourself with light as with a garment, stretching out the heavens like a tent." Psalm 104:2

True - compare Isaiah 40:22,26 which not only refers to the expansion/stretching out of the heavens but also links the existence of stars (v.26) to God's power (Hebrew singular koach) and dynamic energy (Hebrew plural ohnim). It is therefore to be expected that plural forms of God's energy are involved with the expansion rate of our universe. Also, since God is invisible it comes as no surprise (to me) that 2 forms of energy involved, gravity and dark energy, are invisible.

Concerning 'tent' it should be noted that the tent of meeting/tabernacle in Scripture is geometrically described as a rectangular prism wherein only 2 dimensions of the relatively flat tent cloths are specified. This may be a hint to how the singularity at the so-called Big Bang was formed since the corner points of the intersection of these tentcloths have no dimensions (reminds me of a singularity).
Also, these tentcloths were relatively flat which is a hint that our universe is 'flat' as many scientists are coming to believe. Quite in contrast with the earth being round (Hebrew chuwg in verse 22 = circle in 2 dimensions, sphere in 3 dimensions).

 

[Newtonian]

How convenient, really. When the authors of the Bibles write 7 days and that becomes an inconvenient timeframe, just change "days" to mean 7,000 years or whatever timeframe fits the fable.

Try to understand the Hebrew and how it used. Today, we are familiar with the expression, "In my grandfather's day..." Certainly no one takes that to mean their grandfather lived one day.

Thank you Meriweather for confirming what I posted about variant Scriptural definitions of Yom/day. I was thinking of Abraham Lincoln's day! The Bible uses this definition of day here:

Genesis 2:4
This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time they were created, in the day that Jehovah* God made earth and heaven.

[Note: this is the first of nearly 7,000 occurrences of the Divine Name in the Hebrew Scriptures.]

Note that history/ generations, time when and "day" are used interchangeably. Hebrew-English interlinear here:

Genesis 2:4 Interlinear: These are births of the heavens and of the earth in their being prepared, in the day of Jehovah God's making earth and heavens;

biblehub.com

Note that "when" is implied by the form of the Hebrew word for created (bara). As a sidepoint, Genesis 1:16 uses a different word for "make" because the stars had already been created but were only then made visible in the sky/atmosphere/expanse between the upper and lower waters. NW ref. footnote on "make" also shows the imperfect Hebrew verb state is being used - the footnote:

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"“And . . . proceeded to make.” Heb., wai·yaʹʽas (from ʽa·sahʹ). Different from “create” (ba·raʼʹ) found in vss 1, 21, 27; 2:3. Progressive action indicated by the imperfect state. See App 3C."

On topic - the accuracy of the Biblical account of creation is another evidence the Bible is God's Word.

Bara is to create something from...non-existence.
Asay is to create a prototype using what has been created; one or more elements.
Y'tzar is to refine.
The unknown Pristine created "The Power of Multiplicity" over the physical and the metaphysical.
That's one way to interpret these words.

Of course, "Hashahmyim" and "Ha'eretz" are actually a bit more complex to explain and each of these words is an acrostic contains the actual elements that were created.

Where are you getting your definitions from?

For example:

Genesis 2:4 [
(KJV+) TheseH428 are the generationsH8435 of the heavensH8064 and of the earthH776 when they were created,H1254 in the dayH3117 that the LORDH3068 GodH430 madeH6213 the earthH776 and the heavens,H8064

H1254/created from Strong's Hebrew dictionary:

H1254
בָּרָא
bârâ'
baw-raw'
A primitive root; (absolutely) to create;....[other definitions and translations]

From Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew definitions:

H1254
בּרא
bârâ'
BDB Definition:
1) to create, shape, form
1a) (Qal) to shape, fashion, create (always with God as subject)
1a1) of heaven and earth
1a2) of individual man
1a3) of new conditions and circumstances
1a4) of transformations
1b) (Niphal) to be created
1b1) of heaven and earth
1b2) of birth
1b3) of something new
1b4) of miracles
1c) (Piel)
1c1) to cut down
1c2) to cut out
2) to be fat
2a) (Hiphil) to make yourselves fat
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root

=======

From Genesis 1:16 [Greek LXX poieo/to make or do]
(KJV+) And GodH430 madeH6213 (H853) twoH8147 greatH1419 lights;H3974 (H853) the greaterH1419 lightH3974 to ruleH4475 the day,H3117 and the lesserH6996 lightH3974 to ruleH4475 the night:H3915 he made the starsH3556 also.

Strong's dictionary:
H6213
עָשָׂה
‛âśâh
aw-saw'
A primitive root; to do or make,...

BDB:
H6213
עשׂה
‛âśâh
BDB Definition:
1) to do, fashion, accomplish, make
1a) (Qal)
1a1) to do, work, make, produce
1a1a) to do
1a1b) to work
1a1c) to deal (with)
1a1d) to act, act with effect, effect
1a2) to make
1a2a) to make
1a2b) to produce
1a2c) to prepare
1a2d) to make (an offering)
1a2e) to attend to, put in order
1a2f) to observe, celebrate
1a2g) to acquire (property)
1a2h) to appoint, ordain, institute
1a2i) to bring about
1a2j) to use
1a2k) to spend, pass
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) to be done
1b2) to be made
1b3) to be produced
1b4) to be offered
1b5) to be observed
1b6) to be used
1c) (Pual) to be made
2) (Piel) to press, squeeze
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root

You failed to cite the Scriptures concerning the other Hebrew words you are referring to - I'll wait for you to do that before I respond further.

My main point is the same as Meriweather's point concerning variant definitions of the Hebrew word for "day" - from Strong's Hebrew dictionary with translations of Yom in KJV:

H3117
יוֹם
yôm
yome
From an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literally (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figuratively (a space of time defined by an associated term), (often used adverbially): - age, + always, + chronicles, continually (-ance), daily, ([birth-], each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, X end, + evening, + (for) ever (-lasting, -more), X full, life, as (so) long as (. . . live), (even) now, + old, + outlived, + perpetually, presently, + remaineth, X required, season, X since, space, then, (process of) time, + as at other times, + in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), X whole (+ age), (full) year (-ly), + younger.
Total KJV occurrences: 2295

The definition in Scripture is determined by the context and cross references - for example "day" in Psalms 90:4. Scientific research also helps determine the definition in Genesis chapter 1.

 

[Hollie]

How convenient, really. When the authors of the Bibles write 7 days and that becomes an inconvenient timeframe, just change "days" to mean 7,000 years or whatever timeframe fits the fable.

Try to understand the Hebrew and how it used. Today, we are familiar with the expression, "In my grandfather's day..." Certainly no one takes that to mean their grandfather lived one day.

It seems you need to have a discussion of Biblical references to what a day means with James Bond. Per post 859, one (or both) of you are wrong.

What a shame the Gods didn't bother to make things clear. That's quite a paradox. Your eternal soul is at stake here and the Gods neglected to make their message understandable.

 

[Newtonian]

First my sense of humor (needed in these times):

After the 5 Ts (teas) [1,2 Thessalonians, 1,2 Timothy, Titus] and the filet mignon (Philemon) - Hebrews some more!

Seriously, a good memory aid for the order of Bible books - after Go Eat Pop Corn (Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians).

So, who wrote Hebrews?

From our Bible dictionary here:

Hebrews, Letter to the — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"Writership of the letter to the Hebrews has been widely ascribed to the apostle Paul. It was accepted as an epistle of Paul by early writers. The Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P⁠46) (of about 200 C.E.) contains Hebrews among nine of Paul’s letters, and Hebrews is listed among “fourteen letters of Paul the apostle” in “The Canon of Athanasius,” of the fourth century C.E."

Manuscripts of the Bible — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"Quite noteworthy is the Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P⁠46) believed to be from about 200 C.E. It has 86 somewhat damaged leaves out of a codex that probably had 104 leaves originally, and it still contains nine of Paul’s inspired letters: Romans, Hebrews, First Corinthians, Second Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, and First Thessalonians. It is noteworthy that the letter to the Hebrews is included in this early codex. Since Hebrews does not give its writer’s name, its composition by Paul has frequently been disputed. But this letter’s inclusion in P⁠46, evidently consisting of Paul’s letters exclusively, indicates that in about 200 C.E., Hebrews was accepted by early Christians as an inspired writing of the apostle Paul. The letter to the Ephesians appears in this codex, thus also refuting arguments that Paul did not write this letter."

“Bearing Thorough Witness” — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"The letter to the Hebrews was addressed to the Hebrew Christians in Judea. Although the letter does not specifically identify the writer, evidence suggests that it was Paul.... Paul sends greetings from Italy, and he mentions Timothy, who was with him in Rome.—Phil. 1:1; Col. 1:1; Philem. 1; Heb. 13:23, 24."

Note: Paul may have omitted his name because he was "apostle to the nations" (=Gentiles). Many Jews were biased against Gentiles - some even hated them! Instead, Paul quoted or referred to many Hebrew Scriptures from a Jewish perspective. And it is the evidence from the Hebrew Scriptures that Paul refers to, not who the author of Hebrews was, that provides the "convincing evidence" as per Hebrews 11:1

Who is Paul anyways?

Why he received that new name and by whom?

Name changing is observed when God -thru his angels- changed the name of guys. But, no letters explain how it happened Saul was changed by Paul?

Remember that name changing must have a reason, and there is a Saul and a Paul, perhaps the same person, perhaps two persons.

If his name wasn't changed by God or the Messiah, who had the authority to do such a change and why the reason for that action is not mentioned at all by any writer, canonical or non-canonical letters or manuscripts?...

As it turns out, “Saul”—derived from the famous first king of Israel, from the tribe of Benjamin, to which Saul/Paul himself belonged (Phil. 3:5)—is simply the Hebrew name for this person. “Paul”—a normal koine name—is his Greek name, derived from the Latin surname Paulus.

For someone born in Tarsus (Acts 21:39) but educated under Gamaliel in Jerusalem (Acts 22:3) in a strict form of Pharisaism (Gal. 1:14; Phil. 3:5–6), this is not unusual. Much as many immigrants to English-speaking worlds take an Anglicized name on top of their ethnic name, many Greek-speaking Jews in Paul’s day would have a Jewish/Hebrew name and a Hellenistic/Greek name.

Good points - thank you for the research. I might add that the definition of the name Paul is 'little one/small' while the definition of the name Saul is 'asked/inquired [of God]. Both fit the apostle Paul. Of course, back then (as now) King Saul was far from humble while Paul was humble - considering himself small or little.

After researching independently (above) I consulted our literature which corrects me and is similar to what you posted little nipper! To wit:

Did You Know? — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"When did Saul become known as Paul?

The apostle Paul was born a Hebrew with Roman citizenship. (Acts 22:27, 28; Philippians 3:5) So it is likely that from childhood he had both the Hebrew name Saul and the Roman name Paul. Some of Paul’s relatives likewise had Roman and Greek names. (Romans 16:7, 21) Additionally, it was not unusual for Jews of that time, particularly among those living outside Israel, to have two names.—Acts 12:12; 13:1.

For over a decade after becoming a Christian, this apostle seemed to have been known mostly by his Hebrew name, Saul. (Acts 13:1, 2) However, on his first missionary journey, about 47/48 C.E., he might have preferred to use his Roman name, Paul. He was commissioned to declare the good news to non-Jews, and he might have felt that his Roman name would be more acceptable. (Acts 9:15; 13:9; Galatians 2:7, 8) He may also have used the name Paul because the Greek pronunciation of his Hebrew name, Saul, is very similar to that of a Greek word that has a bad connotation. Whatever the reason for the change, Paul showed that he was willing to “become all things to people of all sorts, that [he] might by all means save some.”—1 Corinthians 9:22."

One reason this came up was why Paul did not state he was the author of the book of Hebrews - one reason was that Paul was a Roman name, not a Hebrew name. Of course, Paul was writing to Hebrews/Jews. Paul was known as an apostle to the nations/gentiles whom some Jews hated. So Paul used the Hebrew Scriptures to prove his points in the book of Hebrews.

 

[Newtonian]

How convenient, really. When the authors of the Bibles write 7 days and that becomes an inconvenient timeframe, just change "days" to mean 7,000 years or whatever timeframe fits the fable.

Try to understand the Hebrew and how it used. Today, we are familiar with the expression, "In my grandfather's day..." Certainly no one takes that to mean their grandfather lived one day.

It seems you need to have a discussion of Biblical references to what a day means with James Bond. Per post 859, one (or both) of you are wrong.

What a shame the Gods didn't bother to make things clear. That's quite a paradox. Your eternal soul is at stake here and the Gods neglected to make their message understandable.

It seems to me that you need to read the dictionaries. The context and cross references make the definitions in Genesis clear - you clearly do not care to research this.

I do not have an eternal soul, btw. See Ezekiel 18:4,20. Why do you think I have an immortal soul????

 

[Newtonian]

However, if you look the light coming to you from the past, then you must understand the past light is not traveling from you but is ARRIVING to you.

My intent was to have ding answer my questions and have a discussion, but his was to make snide remarks for my being a fundamentalist Christian vs. his deism. He says he is Catholic, but doesn't use the Bible nor attend church.

The way I have used the map I posted is if we were are able to travel at c to some point on the cone such as the someplace beyond our galaxy. Then we would have to calculate the coordinates carefully and realize where we want to go may not be there at present. If not correct, then we could just overshoot or undershoot our destination by far and screw up our fuel that we have to make the trip there and back.

Tell us James, where did you get your physics degree?

Actually I know

Wikipedia

Most of us don't have a physics degree. The example I posted I got if we had an extensive space map, could travel at the speed of light, and we had to map out our trip on how to get there. Some things would be easy like SF to NYC. No need to change the map, but our watches would say we got there instantaneously. However, if the location where we want to visit is light years away, maybe over 100 light years away, then it would be more difficult to calculate. We also would have to be in suspended animation in order to be alive at the end of our trip.

True/

 

[Newtonian]

Try to understand the Hebrew and how it used. Today, we are familiar with the expression, "In my grandfather's day..." Certainly no one takes that to mean their grandfather lived one day.

No. One day = 24 hrs. In the prophecies, one day = one year.

"In our opinion, examination of the Hebrew word for “day” and the context in which it appears in Genesis will lead to the conclusion that “day” means a literal, 24-hour period of time.

The Hebrew word yom translated into the English “day” can mean more than one thing. It can refer to the 24-hour period of time that it takes for the earth to rotate on its axis (e.g., “there are 24 hours in a day”). It can refer to the period of daylight between dawn and dusk (e.g., “it gets pretty hot during the day but it cools down a bit at night”). And it can refer to an unspecified period of time (e.g., “back in my grandfather’s day . . .”). It is used to refer to a 24-hour period in Genesis 7:11. It is used to refer to the period of daylight between dawn and dusk in Genesis 1:16. And it is used to refer to an unspecified period of time in Genesis 2:4. So, what does yom mean in Genesis 1:5–2:2 when used in conjunction with ordinal numbers (i.e., the first day, the second day, the third day, the fourth day, the fifth day, the sixth day, and the seventh day)? Are these 24-hour periods or something else? Could yom as it is used here mean an unspecified period of time?"

Does Genesis chapter 1 mean literal 24-hour days? | GotQuestions.org

Does Genesis chapter 1 mean literal 24-hour days? Could the days in Genesis chapter 1 represent long periods of time?

www.gotquestions.org

AFAIK, this is how creation science interprets it, but some believers here believe in evolution or false science.

Good points. I neglected to mention as you did that a day can mean a year in Bible prophecy, especially in cases involving punishments of Israel - for example:

1. Numbers 14:34 - a year for each day in that the spies took 40 days to spy out the land before coming back with their false report - and Israel was punished by wandering 40 years in the wilderness.

2. Ezekiel 4:6 - also a year for each day:

“The End Is Now Upon You” — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"Besides foretelling how Jerusalem would be destroyed, Ezekiel also acted out when that would happen. Ezekiel was told by Jehovah to lie on his left side for 390 days and on his right side for 40 days. Each day represented a year. (Read Ezekiel 4:4-6; Num. 14:34) That enactment, which Ezekiel must have performed for only a part of each day, pointed to the exact year of Jerusalem’s destruction. The 390 years of Israel’s error evidently began in 997 B.C.E., the year that the 12-tribe kingdom was divided into two parts. (1 Ki. 12:12-20) The 40 years of Judah’s sin likely began in 647 B.C.E., which was the year that Jeremiah was commissioned as a prophet to warn the kingdom of Judah, in clear-cut terms, about its coming destruction. (Jer. 1:1, 2, 17-19; 19:3, 4) Thus, both time periods would end in 607 B.C.E., the exact year in which Jerusalem fell and was destroyed, just as Jehovah had foretold.*"

3. Daniel 9:24-27 - the 70 weeks of years from the going forth of the word to rebuild Jerusalem in 455 BCE until the Messiah/Christ/anointed one came at the end of the 69th week of years (483 years later) when Jesus became the Messiah by being anointed with holy spirit at this baptism in 29 CE. I can post more on this if you would like me to.

4. The 7 times of Daniel 4:16,17 - compare Revelation 12:6 (1260 days) = 3.5 times (Rev.12:14) - hence 7 times = 2520 days. But 2520 days from 607 BCE nothing noteworthy happenned. So it is appropriate that while the first coming of the Messiah was a day for a year (Dan.9:24-27) the second coming of the lowliest one of mankind (Dan.4:16,17) would also be a day for a year. 2520 years after 607 BCE was 1914 CE, when the nations became wrathful when the 7th trumpet was blown that the Messiah/lowliest one of mankind took possession of the kingdom of mankind/the world as per Revelation 11:15 & Daniel 4:16,17. Revelation 11:18 then shows "the nations became wrathful" which was at the onset of World War I in 1914.

So yes, James Bond - another definition of a day is a year in Bible prophecy - agreed on that - though you may not agree on all the details?

 

[Indeependent]

How convenient, really. When the authors of the Bibles write 7 days and that becomes an inconvenient timeframe, just change "days" to mean 7,000 years or whatever timeframe fits the fable.

Try to understand the Hebrew and how it used. Today, we are familiar with the expression, "In my grandfather's day..." Certainly no one takes that to mean their grandfather lived one day.

Thank you Meriweather for confirming what I posted about variant Scriptural definitions of Yom/day. I was thinking of Abraham Lincoln's day! The Bible uses this definition of day here:

Genesis 2:4
This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time they were created, in the day that Jehovah* God made earth and heaven.

[Note: this is the first of nearly 7,000 occurrences of the Divine Name in the Hebrew Scriptures.]

Note that history/ generations, time when and "day" are used interchangeably. Hebrew-English interlinear here:

Genesis 2:4 Interlinear: These are births of the heavens and of the earth in their being prepared, in the day of Jehovah God's making earth and heavens;

biblehub.com

Note that "when" is implied by the form of the Hebrew word for created (bara). As a sidepoint, Genesis 1:16 uses a different word for "make" because the stars had already been created but were only then made visible in the sky/atmosphere/expanse between the upper and lower waters. NW ref. footnote on "make" also shows the imperfect Hebrew verb state is being used - the footnote:

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"“And . . . proceeded to make.” Heb., wai·yaʹʽas (from ʽa·sahʹ). Different from “create” (ba·raʼʹ) found in vss 1, 21, 27; 2:3. Progressive action indicated by the imperfect state. See App 3C."

On topic - the accuracy of the Biblical account of creation is another evidence the Bible is God's Word.

Bara is to create something from...non-existence.
Asay is to create a prototype using what has been created; one or more elements.
Y'tzar is to refine.
The unknown Pristine created "The Power of Multiplicity" over the physical and the metaphysical.
That's one way to interpret these words.

Of course, "Hashahmyim" and "Ha'eretz" are actually a bit more complex to explain and each of these words is an acrostic contains the actual elements that were created.

Where are you getting your definitions from?

For example:

Genesis 2:4 [
(KJV+) TheseH428 are the generationsH8435 of the heavensH8064 and of the earthH776 when they were created,H1254 in the dayH3117 that the LORDH3068 GodH430 madeH6213 the earthH776 and the heavens,H8064

H1254/created from Strong's Hebrew dictionary:

H1254
בָּרָא
bârâ'
baw-raw'
A primitive root; (absolutely) to create;....[other definitions and translations]

From Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew definitions:

H1254
בּרא
bârâ'
BDB Definition:
1) to create, shape, form
1a) (Qal) to shape, fashion, create (always with God as subject)
1a1) of heaven and earth
1a2) of individual man
1a3) of new conditions and circumstances
1a4) of transformations
1b) (Niphal) to be created
1b1) of heaven and earth
1b2) of birth
1b3) of something new
1b4) of miracles
1c) (Piel)
1c1) to cut down
1c2) to cut out
2) to be fat
2a) (Hiphil) to make yourselves fat
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root

=======

From Genesis 1:16 [Greek LXX poieo/to make or do]
(KJV+) And GodH430 madeH6213 (H853) twoH8147 greatH1419 lights;H3974 (H853) the greaterH1419 lightH3974 to ruleH4475 the day,H3117 and the lesserH6996 lightH3974 to ruleH4475 the night:H3915 he made the starsH3556 also.

Strong's dictionary:
H6213
עָשָׂה
‛âśâh
aw-saw'
A primitive root; to do or make,...

BDB:
H6213
עשׂה
‛âśâh
BDB Definition:
1) to do, fashion, accomplish, make
1a) (Qal)
1a1) to do, work, make, produce
1a1a) to do
1a1b) to work
1a1c) to deal (with)
1a1d) to act, act with effect, effect
1a2) to make
1a2a) to make
1a2b) to produce
1a2c) to prepare
1a2d) to make (an offering)
1a2e) to attend to, put in order
1a2f) to observe, celebrate
1a2g) to acquire (property)
1a2h) to appoint, ordain, institute
1a2i) to bring about
1a2j) to use
1a2k) to spend, pass
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) to be done
1b2) to be made
1b3) to be produced
1b4) to be offered
1b5) to be observed
1b6) to be used
1c) (Pual) to be made
2) (Piel) to press, squeeze
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root

You failed to cite the Scriptures concerning the other Hebrew words you are referring to - I'll wait for you to do that before I respond further.

My main point is the same as Meriweather's point concerning variant definitions of the Hebrew word for "day" - from Strong's Hebrew dictionary with translations of Yom in KJV:

H3117
יוֹם
yôm
yome
From an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literally (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figuratively (a space of time defined by an associated term), (often used adverbially): - age, + always, + chronicles, continually (-ance), daily, ([birth-], each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, X end, + evening, + (for) ever (-lasting, -more), X full, life, as (so) long as (. . . live), (even) now, + old, + outlived, + perpetually, presently, + remaineth, X required, season, X since, space, then, (process of) time, + as at other times, + in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), X whole (+ age), (full) year (-ly), + younger.
Total KJV occurrences: 2295

The definition in Scripture is determined by the context and cross references - for example "day" in Psalms 90:4. Scientific research also helps determine the definition in Genesis chapter 1.

Kaballah...
I will hopefully have the time to break the words out.
I have actually done this by spending about 20 or so hours with the first 7 words after our last discussion.
The "secret" is that every Hebrew words has a 2 letter root, not a 3 letter root.

B'Rayshis, for instance, means "Within The Pristine".
Rayshis does not mean "In the beginning" in any way whatsoever, and a careful study of the ever elusive Midrash keeps defining Rayshis as a "Pristine" fruit or crop.

B means within something's essence...
This is the concept of Tzimtzum...cause a "gap", so to speak within one's own essence to allow for something else to exist.
The attribute within the sfree-irote that expresses this "giving to another" is G'dow-lah, erroneously translated outside of Kabbalah as "Physically Big".
For instance, when God tell Avraham he will become a Great (Gah-dole) Nation, Gos doesn't mean large in number or able to kick some {insert your own word here), it means that Avraham's descendants will have room for the rest of the world to survive and thrive.
That's why Jews are generally identified with charities.

"The Pristine" is the unknowable Creator who's lack of duplicity is so perfect that it's creation cannot comprehend it's existence in any manner whatsoever.
No creation falls outside of Pristine's Created Laws of Physics...
Which automatically infers movement and give and take.

The dictionaries came about due to the Septuagint and, later on, the KJV.
Prior to that, no Jew ever learned in any language but Hebrew and Aramaic, which means that Aramaic is a divine language that has an intrinsic role to play in existence.

I typed that pretty fast so it may be messy.

I know it hurts when people don't use the dictionaries.
It used to annoy me.
But I spent the last six years in the Torah portion cycle and a lot of the English, which I relied on heavily, started to not make any sense in light of the explanations from the sages.

The first verse translation also leave out the Hebrew word "et", which is mentioned twice, and God, that English translation sucks!
"Et" is a huge word.

 

[Newtonian]

So, to review the chemical reaction product proportions in Miller's experiment in descending order of occurrence I have posted on so far:

Glycine - C₂H₅NO₂ - proportion: 440
Alanine - C3H7NO2 - proportion: 790
alpha-aminobutyric acid - C₄H₉NO₂ - proportion: 270
a(alpha)-Hydroxy-aminobutyric acid - C4H8O3 - proportion: 74

Next in proportion from table 3-2 on page 23 is Norvaline - proportion: 61

Like the latter 2 above, Norvaline is NOT found in proteins - so why wasn't it selected?

From Google:

"Norvaline is an amino acid with the formula CH₃(CH₂)₂CHCO₂H. The compound is an isomer of the more common amino acid valine. Like most other α-amino acids, norvaline is chiral. It is a white, water-soluble solid ... Chemical formula‎: ‎C5H11NO2"

============================

Next in proportion is Sarcosine - proportion 55.

Sarcosine is also NOT found in proteins - why didn't it get selected?

From Google search:

"Sarcosine, also known as N-methylglycine, is an intermediate and byproduct in glycine synthesis and degradation. ... Formula: C3H7NO2"

As a side point,, Sarcosine can stimulate prostate cancer cells to go from benign to malignant. It has also been proposed in combination with other drugs to treat schizophrenia. It effects the brain.

Again, sarcosine is not found in proteins.

======================

The next 4 amino acids in proportion are 34, 33, 30 and 30 again - most are not found in proteins but:

Aspartic acid is in proportion: 34. It IS one of the 20 amino acids found in proteins (we have 3 so far in proportion). From google:

"Aspartic acid (symbol Asp or D; the ionic form is known as aspartate), is an α-amino acid that is used in the biosynthesis of proteins. Similar to all other amino acids, it contains an amino group and a carboxylic acid. ... Formula: C4H7NO4"

==================

Next in proportion: a:y-Diaminobutyric acid (format changed alpha gamma to a:y) - proportion 33.

From:

CID 158725018

CID 158725018 | C8H20N4O4 | CID 158725018 - structure, chemical names, physical and chemical properties, classification, patents, literature, biological activities, safety/hazards/toxicity information, supplier lists, and more.

pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

"2,4-diaminobutyric acid is a diamino acid that is butyric acid in which a hydrogen at position 2 and a hydrogen at position 4 are replaced by amino groups. It is a diamino acid, a gamma-amino acid and a non-proteinogenic alpha-amino acid. It derives from a butyric acid....C4H10N2O2 "

It is fairly complex but is NOT used in proteins.

So, why wasn't it selected? (in its isomers and polarizations)

On the other hand:

Icon of Obfuscation

www.talkorigins.org

Chapter 2: Miller-Urey experiment
Prebiotic Oxygen. A key question in origin-of-life research is the oxidation state of the prebiotic atmosphere (the current best guess is that the origin of life occurred somewhere around 4.0-3.7 bya (billion years ago)). Wells wants you to think that there is good evidence for significant amounts free oxygen in the prebiotic atmosphere (significant amounts of free oxygen make the atmosphere oxidizing and make Miller-Urey-type experiments fail). He spends several pages (14-19) on a pseudo-discussion of the oxygen issue, citing sources from the 1970's and writing that (p. 17) "the controversy has never been resolved", that "Evidence from early rocks has been inconclusive," and concluding that the current geological consensus -- that oxygen was merely a trace gas before approximately 2.5 bya and only began rising after this point -- was due to "Dogma [taking] the place of empirical evidence" (p. 18). None of this is true (see e.g. Copley, 2001).

• Certain minerals, such as uraninite, cannot form under significant exposure to oxygen. Thick deposits of these rocks are found in rocks older than 2.5 bya years ago, indicating that essentially no oxygen (only trace amounts) was present. On page 17 Wells notes that uraninite deposits have been found in more recent rocks, but neglects to mention to his readers that these only occur under rapid-burial conditions, whereas ancient deposits of uraninite occur in slow deposition conditions, for example in sediments laid down by rivers, so that the minerals were exposed to atmospheric gases for significant periods of time before burial.
• 'Red beds' are geologic features containing highly oxidized iron (rust) indicative of high amounts of oxygen. Wells (p. 17) notes that red beds are found before 2 bya, but fails to mention that the temporal limit of red beds is just a few hundred million years before 2 bya.
• Wells doesn't even mention the evidence that banded iron formations (incompletely oxidized iron indicative of ultralow-oxygen conditions) are very common prior to 2.3 bya and very rare afterwards.
• Wells also doesn't mention that early paleosols (fossil soils) from about ~2.5 bya contain unoxidized cerium, impossible in an oxygenic atmosphere (e.g., Murakami et al., 2001).
• Finally, Wells doesn't mention to his readers that pyrite, a mineral even more vulnerable to oxidation than uraninite, is found unoxidized in pre-2.5 bya rocks, and with significant evidence of long surface exposure (i.e. grains weathered by water erosion; e.g. Rasmussen and Buick, 1999).

Why does Wells leave out the converging independent lines of geological evidence pointing to an anoxic early (pre ~2.5 bya) atmosphere?

Was the prebiotic atmosphere reducing? Are the Miller-Urey experiments "irrelevant"? The famous Miller-Urey experiments used a strongly reducing atmosphere to produce amino acids. It is important to realize that the original experiment is famous not so much for the exact mixture used, but for the unexpected discovery that such a simple experiment could indeed produce crucial biological compounds; this discovery instigated a huge amount of related research that continues today.

Now, current geochemical opinion is that the prebiotic atmosphere was not so strongly reducing as the original Miller-Urey atmosphere, but opinion varies widely from moderately reducing to neutral. Completely neutral atmospheres would be bad for Miller-Urey-type experiments, but even a weakly reducing atmosphere will produce lower but significant amounts of amino acids. In the approximately two pages of text where Wells actually discusses the reducing atmosphere question (p. 20-22), Wells cites some more 1970's sources and then asserts that the irrelevance of the Miller-Urey experiment has become a "near-consensus among geochemists" (p. 21).

• This statement is misleading. What geochemists agree on is that if the early earth's mantle was of the same composition as the modern mantle and if only terrestrial volcanic sources are considered as contributing to the atmosphere, and if the temperature profile of the early atmosphere was the same as modern earth (this is relevant to rates of hydrogen escape) then there will be much less hydrogen compared to Miller's first atmosphere (20% total atm.). Even if this worst-case scenario is accepted, hydrogen will not be completely absent, in fact there is a long list of geochemists that consider hydrogen to have been present (although in lower amounts, roughly 0.1-1% of the total atmosphere). At these levels of H2 there is still significant (although much lower) amino acid production.
• Also, many geochemists think that these conditions do not represent the early earth, contrary to the impression given by Wells. For example, on p. 20, Wells mentions terrestrial volcanos emitting neutral gases (H2O, CO2, N2, and only trace H2), but he fails to mention that mid-ocean ridge vents could have been significant sources of reduced gases -- they are important sources of reduced atmospheric gases even today, emitting about 1% methane (Kasting and Brown, 1998) and producing reduced hydrogen and hydrogen sulfide (e.g. Kelley et al., 2001; Perkins, 2001; Von Damm, 2001) and potentially ammonia prebiotically (Brandes et al., 1998; Chyba, 1998). Why does Wells exclude oceanic vents from consideration?
• Another strange omission is that Wells completely fails to mention the extraterrestrial evidence, which is the only direct evidence we have of the kinds of chemical reactions that might have occurred in the early solar system. For example he neglects to mention the famous Murchison meteorite, which contains mixtures of organic compounds much like those produced in Miller-Urey style experiments, and which constitutes direct evidence that just the right kind of prebiotic chemistry was occurring at least somewhere in the early solar system, and that some of those products found their way to earth (see e.g. Engel and Macko, 2001 for a recent review).
• Wells asserts that since the 1970's, non-reducing atmospheres have become the "near-consensus." The latest article that Wells cites supporting this view, however, is a 1995 nontechnical news article in Science (Cohen, 1995). Why doesn't he quote Kral et al. (1998), who write,
  

  The standard theory for the origin of life postulates that life arose from an abiotically produced soup of organic material (e.g., Miller, 1953; Miller, 1992). The first organism would have therefore been a heterotroph deriving energy from this existing pool of nutrients. This theory for the origin of life is not without competitors (for a review of theories for the origins of life see Davis and McKay, 1996), but has received considerable support from laboratory experiments in which it has been demonstrated that biologically relevant organic materials can be easily synthesized from mildly reducing mixtures of gases (e.g., Chang et al., 1983). The discovery of organics in comets (e.g., Kissel and Kruger, 1987), on Titan (e.g., Sagan et al., 1984), elsewhere in the outer solar system (e.g., Encrenaz, 1986), as well as in the interstellar medium (e.g., Irvine and Knacke, 1989) has further strengthened the notion that organic material was abundant prior to the origin of life.

None of this is meant to convey the impression that no controversies exist (both Cohen (1995) and the Davis and McKay (1996) article cited by the above-quoted Kral et al. (1998) are about the various competing hypotheses about the origin of life). But textbooks generally mention some of these hypotheses (briefly of course, as there is only space for a page or two on this topic in an introductory textbook), and furthermore generally mention that the original atmosphere was likely more weakly reducing than the original Miller-Urey experiment hypothesized, but that many variations with mildly reducing conditions still produce satisfactory results. This is exactly what is written in the most popular college biology textbook, Campbell et al.'s (1999) Biology, for instance. In other words, the textbooks basically summarize what the recent literature is saying. The original Miller-Urey experiment, despite its limitations, is also repeatedly cited in modern scientific literature as a landmark experiment. So why does Wells have a problem with the textbooks following the literature? Wells wants textbooks to follow the experts, and it appears that they are.

The RNA world.Wells writes (p. 22) as if the RNA world is an alternative to failed Miller-Urey-style experimentation. He cites no source for this claim, because the claim is pure obfuscation.

• The RNA world hypothesis is complementary, not opposed, to Miller-style prebiotic syntheses, as it is meant to explain how genetic replication got going without DNA, several steps down the road after prebiotic syntheses.
• Wells gives the impression that there are only two possible starts to life on earth, Urey-Miller style syntheses and the RNA world. Wells misleadingly cites several quotes that taken alone suggest that the RNA world is impossible, and that there is no remaining scientific explanations for life on earth. However, most authorities agree that the RNA world was one stage of the origin of life, rather than the very first stage, and that it was proceeded by a pre-RNA world. Indeed, the very authors he quotes to suggest that the RNA world is impossible go on to explain the concept of a pre-RNA world and how an RNA world would arise from that, but Wells omits all mention of this. Wells doesn't bother to cite recent work on precursors to the RNA world, see for example Cavalier-Smith (2001) for an introduction and references to ideas on this such as the 'NA world' and 'lipid world' (for the latter, see e.g. Segre et al., 2001).

How can I take you seriously when you depend on a looney tunes blogger who has no credentials and doesn't even identify himself?

Now, you're whipping out the talk origins fake science website and instead of explaining what you read in your own words using them as your argument.

I can easily refer to the true origins science website and present an article to refute the talk origin page.

Basically, Urey and Miller assumed what early Earth gases were present in order to create the amino acids. They ended up fixing their experiment in order to produce the amino acids. We find that they used N2, CO2, O2, H2, CH4, NH3, and water vapor along with a sparker for their experiment. Wells points out the majority of scientists believe in not these gases, but the volcanic gases were present on early Earth along with water vapor. Thus, you can't produce the amino acids as you claim by doing the Miller-Urey experiment with the volcanic gases can you?

Let's see you try. Tell me the gases Urey and Miller used to achieve their results?

Miller-Urey Experiment

www.millerureyexperiment.com

Just pick the gases and press the sparker. The water vapor is present from the boiling water in the beaker. Hint: You can have any oxygen or have oxygen produced.

I think you meant can't.

Good points James Bond and thank you for pointing out another reason early earth had a predominance of carbon it the form of carbon dioxide (CO2) which is a primary gas from volcanic outgassing. Of course, earth's crustal carbonates give a more specific idea of how much CO2 in early earth's atmosphere since over 64 million petagrams of carbon are in the oxidized carbonates in earth's crust.

CO2 has oxygen, methane/CH4 doesn't but has plenty of hydrogen. And, yes, many scientists are coming to remove themselves from the biased presumed early earth atmosphere of methane (CH4) and ammonia (NH3) and beginning to realize CO2 predominated. But bias among scientists doesn't change easily!

Oh, and as I posted (and am researching) Miller produced mostly non-proteinous/biologic amino acids both in number and in chemical reaction product proportions. Not to mention the primary products were not amino acids - the primary product was formic acid.

Sadly, the media generally repeats the bias that was prevalent when Miller-Urey performed their famous experiment. Few actually do the research necessary to determine accuracy of statement.

That applies to other news media reports also including Covid-19/Corona virus.

We have repeatedly been counseled to check accuracy of statement before believing anything - especially from the media and internet. Politics is also a good example of biased reports btw.

Off to sleep I go - hope you and and you all have a good night - pleasant dreams!

 

[james bond]

True - compare Isaiah 40:22,26 which not only refers to the expansion/stretching out of the heavens but also links the existence of stars (v.26) to God's power (Hebrew singular koach) and dynamic energy (Hebrew plural ohnim). It is therefore to be expected that plural forms of God's energy are involved with the expansion rate of our universe. Also, since God is invisible it comes as no surprise (to me) that 2 forms of energy involved, gravity and dark energy, are invisible.

Thanks. Since other Bible writers have wrote this, then this is one of those occurrences that were verified by the kings. I agree with gravity as I think Jesus stands in the way of all humans with his outstretched hands. I've heard dark energy is described as God, but I don't like that term nor the term dark matter. God usually has to do with light, so I like to think the Trinity is part of the EMS. We'll have to see what the dark matter and dark energy turn out to be .

So yes, James Bond - another definition of a day is a year in Bible prophecy - agreed on that - though you may not agree on all the details?

I agree a day is a year when doing all of the prophecy calculations (?). Then we have the seventy 7s which refers to 490 years in Daniel, and that in turn is divided as you stated. I think the final 7 years of the latter is the tribulation and that is further divided into 3.5 years in between.

I'd like to hear how you explain it.

What are the seventy weeks of Daniel? | GotQuestions.org

What are the seventy (70) weeks of Daniel? Do the seventy weeks represent 490 years in God’s program? How are the seventy weeks divided?

www.gotquestions.org

 

[Newtonian]

E

How convenient, really. When the authors of the Bibles write 7 days and that becomes an inconvenient timeframe, just change "days" to mean 7,000 years or whatever timeframe fits the fable.

Try to understand the Hebrew and how it used. Today, we are familiar with the expression, "In my grandfather's day..." Certainly no one takes that to mean their grandfather lived one day.

Thank you Meriweather for confirming what I posted about variant Scriptural definitions of Yom/day. I was thinking of Abraham Lincoln's day! The Bible uses this definition of day here:

Genesis 2:4
This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time they were created, in the day that Jehovah* God made earth and heaven.

[Note: this is the first of nearly 7,000 occurrences of the Divine Name in the Hebrew Scriptures.]

Note that history/ generations, time when and "day" are used interchangeably. Hebrew-English interlinear here:

Genesis 2:4 Interlinear: These are births of the heavens and of the earth in their being prepared, in the day of Jehovah God's making earth and heavens;

biblehub.com

Note that "when" is implied by the form of the Hebrew word for created (bara). As a sidepoint, Genesis 1:16 uses a different word for "make" because the stars had already been created but were only then made visible in the sky/atmosphere/expanse between the upper and lower waters. NW ref. footnote on "make" also shows the imperfect Hebrew verb state is being used - the footnote:

Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

"“And . . . proceeded to make.” Heb., wai·yaʹʽas (from ʽa·sahʹ). Different from “create” (ba·raʼʹ) found in vss 1, 21, 27; 2:3. Progressive action indicated by the imperfect state. See App 3C."

On topic - the accuracy of the Biblical account of creation is another evidence the Bible is God's Word.

Bara is to create something from...non-existence.
Asay is to create a prototype using what has been created; one or more elements.
Y'tzar is to refine.
The unknown Pristine created "The Power of Multiplicity" over the physical and the metaphysical.
That's one way to interpret these words.

Of course, "Hashahmyim" and "Ha'eretz" are actually a bit more complex to explain and each of these words is an acrostic contains the actual elements that were created.

Where are you getting your definitions from?

For example:

Genesis 2:4 [
(KJV+) TheseH428 are the generationsH8435 of the heavensH8064 and of the earthH776 when they were created,H1254 in the dayH3117 that the LORDH3068 GodH430 madeH6213 the earthH776 and the heavens,H8064

H1254/created from Strong's Hebrew dictionary:

H1254
בָּרָא
bârâ'
baw-raw'
A primitive root; (absolutely) to create;....[other definitions and translations]

From Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew definitions:

H1254
בּרא
bârâ'
BDB Definition:
1) to create, shape, form
1a) (Qal) to shape, fashion, create (always with God as subject)
1a1) of heaven and earth
1a2) of individual man
1a3) of new conditions and circumstances
1a4) of transformations
1b) (Niphal) to be created
1b1) of heaven and earth
1b2) of birth
1b3) of something new
1b4) of miracles
1c) (Piel)
1c1) to cut down
1c2) to cut out
2) to be fat
2a) (Hiphil) to make yourselves fat
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root

=======

From Genesis 1:16 [Greek LXX poieo/to make or do]
(KJV+) And GodH430 madeH6213 (H853) twoH8147 greatH1419 lights;H3974 (H853) the greaterH1419 lightH3974 to ruleH4475 the day,H3117 and the lesserH6996 lightH3974 to ruleH4475 the night:H3915 he made the starsH3556 also.

Strong's dictionary:
H6213
עָשָׂה
‛âśâh
aw-saw'
A primitive root; to do or make,...

BDB:
H6213
עשׂה
‛âśâh
BDB Definition:
1) to do, fashion, accomplish, make
1a) (Qal)
1a1) to do, work, make, produce
1a1a) to do
1a1b) to work
1a1c) to deal (with)
1a1d) to act, act with effect, effect
1a2) to make
1a2a) to make
1a2b) to produce
1a2c) to prepare
1a2d) to make (an offering)
1a2e) to attend to, put in order
1a2f) to observe, celebrate
1a2g) to acquire (property)
1a2h) to appoint, ordain, institute
1a2i) to bring about
1a2j) to use
1a2k) to spend, pass
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) to be done
1b2) to be made
1b3) to be produced
1b4) to be offered
1b5) to be observed
1b6) to be used
1c) (Pual) to be made
2) (Piel) to press, squeeze
Part of Speech: verb
A Related Word by BDB/Strong’s Number: a primitive root

You failed to cite the Scriptures concerning the other Hebrew words you are referring to - I'll wait for you to do that before I respond further.

My main point is the same as Meriweather's point concerning variant definitions of the Hebrew word for "day" - from Strong's Hebrew dictionary with translations of Yom in KJV:

H3117
יוֹם
yôm
yome
From an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literally (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figuratively (a space of time defined by an associated term), (often used adverbially): - age, + always, + chronicles, continually (-ance), daily, ([birth-], each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, X end, + evening, + (for) ever (-lasting, -more), X full, life, as (so) long as (. . . live), (even) now, + old, + outlived, + perpetually, presently, + remaineth, X required, season, X since, space, then, (process of) time, + as at other times, + in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), X whole (+ age), (full) year (-ly), + younger.
Total KJV occurrences: 2295

The definition in Scripture is determined by the context and cross references - for example "day" in Psalms 90:4. Scientific research also helps determine the definition in Genesis chapter 1.

Kaballah...
I will hopefully have the time to break the words out.
I have actually done this by spending about 20 or so hours with the first 7 words after our last discussion.
The "secret" is that every Hebrew words has a 2 letter root, not a 3 letter root.

B'Rayshis, for instance, means "Within The Pristine".
Rayshis does not mean "In the beginning" in any way whatsoever, and a careful study of the ever elusive Midrash keeps defining Rayshis as a "Pristine" fruit or crop.

B means within something's essence...
This is the concept of Tzimtzum...cause a "gap", so to speak within one's own essence to allow for something else to exist.
The attribute within the sfree-irote that expresses this "giving to another" is G'dow-lah, erroneously translated outside of Kabbalah as "Physically Big".
For instance, when God tell Avraham he will become a Great (Gah-dole) Nation, Gos doesn't mean large in number or able to kick some {insert your own word here), it means that Avraham's descendants will have room for the rest of the world to survive and thrive.
That's why Jews are generally identified with charities.

"The Pristine" is the unknowable Creator who's lack of duplicity is so perfect that it's creation cannot comprehend it's existence in any manner whatsoever.
No creation falls outside of Pristine's Created Laws of Physics...
Which automatically infers movement and give and take.

The dictionaries came about due to the Septuagint and, later on, the KJV.
Prior to that, no Jew ever learned in any language but Hebrew and Aramaic, which means that Aramaic is a divine language that has an intrinsic role to play in existence.

I typed that pretty fast so it may be messy.

I know it hurts when people don't use the dictionaries.
It used to annoy me.
But I spent the last six years in the Torah portion cycle and a lot of the English, which I relied on heavily, started to not make any sense in light of the explanations from the sages.

The first verse translation also leave out the Hebrew word "et", which is mentioned twice, and God, that English translation sucks!
"Et" is a huge word.

Kind of off topic, but why do you think every Hebrew word has a two letter root - the quotes I posted show otherwise.

On topic, the name of God in the Bible has 4 consonants (the original Hebrew had no written vowels) YHWH = JHVH in English. The name Jehovah (English form) contains a Hebrew verb with 3 consonants. Do you know what they are, what the definition of that verb is and how the primary definition in the causative sense relates to creation?

Hint: not merely existence - all verbs require action which, in turn, requires time.

On that note - its time for me to sleep. Sleeping is a verb requiring time.

Oh - if you have a sense of humor involving sages:

Sage Seeds - Grow Common and Organic Sage, Herb Seeds - Burpee

This shrubby herb has a distinctive rounded shape and a striking leaf texture. Sage leaf tea is useful in treating colds and for aiding digestion. Burpee

www.burpee.com

• 
  
  ★★★★★ ★★★★★ 3.8 out of 5 stars. Read reviews for Sage, Common 3.8 (6)
  
  Sage, Common
  Short Description
  Used in sausages, poultry, meat, bread, dressings, vegetables, omelets and stuffing.
  $4.95 - $16.95
  
  Seeds and Plants
• 
  
  ★★★★★ ★★★★★ No rating value for Sage, Organic (0)
  
  Sage, Organic
  Short Description
  Used in sausages, poultry, meat, bread, dressings, vegetables, omelets and stuffing.
  $3.45
  
  Seeds
• 
  
  ★★★★★ ★★★★★ 5 out of 5 stars. Read reviews for Sage, Pineapple 5.0 (2)
  
  Sage, Pineapple
  Short Description
  Pineapple-scented leaves to infuse cold drinks, fruit salads and more
• 
  
• Yum! How about pineapple sage in a Pina-Colada!
• 
  
• Pleasant dreams you all!

 

[james bond]

Oh, and as I posted (and am researching) Miller produced mostly non-proteinous/biologic amino acids both in number and in chemical reaction product proportions. Not to mention the primary products were not amino acids - the primary product was formic acid.

One has to clear out any gases remaining when re-doing the Miller-Urey experiment on the link I provided. Let me see what amino acids or formic acids it formed after 1 to 2 weeks time. It was Alanine and Glycine.

 

[Newtonian]

True - compare Isaiah 40:22,26 which not only refers to the expansion/stretching out of the heavens but also links the existence of stars (v.26) to God's power (Hebrew singular koach) and dynamic energy (Hebrew plural ohnim). It is therefore to be expected that plural forms of God's energy are involved with the expansion rate of our universe. Also, since God is invisible it comes as no surprise (to me) that 2 forms of energy involved, gravity and dark energy, are invisible.

Thanks. Since other Bible writers have wrote this, then this is one of those occurrences that were verified by the kings. I agree with gravity as I think Jesus stands in the way of all humans with his outstretched hands. I've heard dark energy is described as God, but I don't like that term nor the term dark matter. God usually has to do with light, so I like to think the Trinity is part of the EMS. We'll have to see what the dark matter and dark energy turn out to be .

So yes, James Bond - another definition of a day is a year in Bible prophecy - agreed on that - though you may not agree on all the details?

I agree a day is a year when doing all of the prophecy calculations (?). Then we have the seventy 7s which refers to 490 years in Daniel, and that in turn is divided as you stated. I think the final 7 years of the latter is the tribulation and that is further divided into 3.5 years in between.

I'd like to hear how you explain it.

What are the seventy weeks of Daniel? | GotQuestions.org

What are the seventy (70) weeks of Daniel? Do the seventy weeks represent 490 years in God’s program? How are the seventy weeks divided?

www.gotquestions.org

Later on that since I am off to sleep.

Well, briefly:

29 CE Jesus' baptism
half of the week sacrifice and gift offering cease and Jesus sacrificed his life/soul for our sins - Isaiah 53:10,12 - in 33 CE.

36 CE - covenant in force for Jews only until first gentiles (Cornelius and family) were baptized in 36 CE, the end of the 70th week.

If you want more in depth you could research our publications index by clicking on publications, then index, then Scripture index (etc.) E.g. our more recent Scripture index is here (you can click on any reference):

Publications — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

One reference to the 70 weeks of years is here:

How 1st-Century Events Are Dated in the 20th Century — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

This is an authorized Web site of Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is a research tool for publications in various languages produced by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

wol.jw.org

 

[Newtonian]

Oh, and as I posted (and am researching) Miller produced mostly non-proteinous/biologic amino acids both in number and in chemical reaction product proportions. Not to mention the primary products were not amino acids - the primary product was formic acid.

View attachment 330266

View attachment 330267

One has to clear out any gases remaining when re-doing the Miller-Urey experiment on the link I provided. Let me see what amino acids or formic acids it formed after 1 to 2 weeks time. It was Alanine and Glycine.

That's the top 2 - there are many others, mostly not found in proteins. See my earlier posts on this - or table 3-2 on page 23 of this link:

https://www.krusch.com/books/evolution/Mystery_of_Lifes_Origin.pdf

The third proteinous amino acid formed in the top 10 by product proportion was Aspartic acid.

Sorry, I need to relax and sleep - hope to continue this tomorrow!

Sleep well!

 

[Bruce Daniels]

Here is a link to Discover magazine concerning 6 numbers which are precisely fine tuned to allow for stars and life as we know it on earth to exist in our universe:

Why is There Life?

Because, says Britain's Astronomer Royal, you happen to be in the right universe

www.discovermagazine.com

The omega=1 is one of these - it is the precise density parameter involved with the expansion rate of our universe. From the link:

"

, which measures the density of material in the universe— including galaxies, diffuse gas, and dark matter. The number reveals the relative importance of gravity in an expanding universe. If gravity were too strong, the universe would have collapsed long before life could have evolved. Had it been too weak, no galaxies or stars could have formed."

= omega (the Greek letter) is used to refer to the density parameter of our universe and it is extremely close to 1 - otherwise stars could not exist. Simply:

=1.5u

See the link for the other 5 numbers involved in the math (physics) of our universe.

Wow. Methinks thou doest protest too much. I don't know anything about all the chemistry involved, but I'd rather believe in chemistry than in some supernatural being.

 

[Bruce Daniels]

Did you know that the central nervous system of every mammal species got larger over time?

I didn't know that and I'm not sure what it means.

It means that very nature of existence is to create intelligence. It is unavoidable. It is not an accident.

That's ridiculous. The nature of existence is to continue to exist. That's it. If more intelligence facilitates that, then more intelligence will probably develop. But life on Earth existed for about 3 billion years before it even had a brain.

Apparently you haven’t studied the evolution of space and time.

the nature of existence is to evolve. It started with cosmic evolution then stellar evolution then chemical evolution then biological evolution and lastly evolution of consciousness.

So the pinnacle of existence is literally intelligence. It is by far the most complex thing the universe has produced and is literally the culmination of everything before it. It’s really no different than building a house.

I can’t wait to see what the next evolutionary leap will bring.

So, according to you, stars will eventually evolve intelligence?

 

[Bruce Daniels]

The short answer: No. We're born, we live, we die. That's it. There is no intelligence controlling the universe.

However in order to be born dna had to be written as codes do not write themselves. Thus god is a scientific requirement

Based on what? Your assumption?

 

[Bruce Daniels]

The short answer: No. We're born, we live, we die. That's it. There is no intelligence controlling the universe.

Some people, for various reasons, believe in a power greater than themselves. Is that a bad thing?

It is if it's not true.

 

[gtopa1]

Now if I was a Christian, I'd be terrified

If you were Christian perhaps you would have a clearer understanding and be at peace.

Maybe so. However, I've never met a Christian who didn't think others would be going to hell but not them.

Catholics aren't really allowed to say BUT we do anyway. lol

Greg